Download Capacity dev,KM, research

Capacity Development, Knowledge
Management & Research
Case Review
Capacity building
• Capacity development is leaving people with
competence, confidence & commitment.
• Two-way flow: building capacity of researchers; stand
back, be a facilitator.
• Long-term steady & patient commitment needed–
20 years time frame. Donors need to know this.
• Scaling up requires institutionalization of approaches
in national policy/processes.
• Science and policy work independently; whose job is
it to cross-over? What is the process to fix this?
Capacity building contd . . .
• Different levels of capacity development: Communities;
Decision makers at various levels; Generators of knowledge
(researchers) on how knowledge can be moved.
• Researchers defining & engaging end user groups and working
jointly towards useful information products to support priority
decisions. Need to strengthen capacity in use of information.
• Information/capacity priorities should be developed within a
broad development framework e.g. soil fertility improvement
may depend on roads.
• Short-term economic gains often determine land user
priorities. Research has to recognize that. E.g. farmers dump
agroforestry spp and only keep Eucalypts.
Capacity development contd . .
• Indigenous knowledge alone not sufficient.
Needs to be scientifically verified.
• Progress often comes from cross-fertilization
of knowledge (indigenous*science; across
scientific fields).
• Build on what’s there; participatory local level
engagement; long-term commitment; crossfertilization of ideas.
How to get these principles embedded
into district/national policy & practice?
• Aim capacity strengthening at district and
national planners.
• Targeted exposure training/experience exchange;
field visits. Decision makers cannot take up what
they do not know.
• Institutional capacity strengthening more than
individuals.
• [Missing cadre of extension providers who are
from land user communities].
• Working with parliamentarians has been
successful.
How to embed contd . .
• Have to expose people to knowledge & ideas
• Role of NARS? Joint implementation with CG centres
successful. But NARS need to be much better
resourced to get wider impacts.
• Communication strategies for tackling higher level
decision makers could help. Both NARS and CG. Need
specialized communication units to develop actionable
messages. Could NARS & CG partner on this?
• Same applies to strengthening capacity in education
system to get next generation on board new concepts.
• Ministry-led Government remains a block; lack of
whole system thinking/coordination.
Knowledge management
• Converting information to knowledge
products a bottleneck; companies spending
60% of resources on knowledge management.
• Not putting existing information to good use.
• Limits to using existing knowledge is lack of
standardized approaches to data collection,
use of study designs, reporting; standards and
guidelines on data collection & reporting to
allow meta-analysis across studies.
Climate change
• Climate change may help to drive us to do the
things we should have been doing anyway.
• Build resilient landscapes = adaptive capacity.
• Scaling up good practice can bring mitigation
benefits given the large areas involved.
Summing up
• No single part of the picture will be sufficient in itself.
• Sustained long-term commitment.
• Strategic interventions:
– Knowledge products – information synthesis
– Standards, guidelines for gathering data on intervention
impacts & meta-analysis
– Communication strategies:
• Exposure training/experience exchange/cross-fertilization
• Actionable messages targeted to specific audiences; esp high level
decision makers. Also educational institutes.
• Media needs to be sustained – work through big agencies (UN,
WWF).